Dibbs v. Mulholland

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Dibbs v. Mulholland

232 A.D.2d 346, 648 N.Y.S.2d 921, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11205

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedOctober 31, 1996

StatusPublished

This text of 232 A.D.2d 346 (Dibbs v. Mulholland) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Dibbs v. Mulholland, 232 A.D.2d 346, 648 N.Y.S.2d 921, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11205 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1996).

Pincite

Opinion

—Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Joan Lobis, J.), entered February 17, 1995, which granted respondent’s cross motions to dismiss this proceeding brought pursuant to CPLR article 78 to annul the Division of Housing and Community Renewal’s determination dated June 28,1994, closing petitioner’s harassment complaint, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The motion court properly found the challenged administrative determination to be nonreviewable at this time since the agency has not yet determined petitioner’s pending petition for administrative review. In these circumstances, neither review nor relief pursuant to CPLR article 78 is available (Matter of Wyndham Realty Co. v New York State Div. of Hous. & Community Renewal, 139 Misc 2d 418, 419-420). Concur—Rosenberger, J. P., Ellerin, Rubin, Kupferman and Nardelli, JJ.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

—Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Joan Lobis, J.), entered February 17, 1995, which granted respondent’s cross motions to dismiss this proceeding brought pursuant to CPLR article 78 to annul the Division of Housing and Community Renewal’s determination dated June 28,1994, closing petitioner’s harassment complaint, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The motion court properly found the challenged administrative determination to be nonreviewable at this time since the agency has not yet determined petitioner’s pending petition for administrative review. In these circumstances, neither review nor relief pursuant to CPLR article 78 is available (Matter of Wyndham Realty Co. v New York State Div. of Hous. & Community Renewal, 139 Misc 2d 418, 419-420). Concur—Rosenberger, J. P., Ellerin, Rubin, Kupferman and Nardelli, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

232 A.D.2d 346, 648 N.Y.S.2d 921, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11205, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/dibbs-v-mulholland-nyappdiv-1996.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack